Reporter for The Canberra Times.

A neglected and unfinished home in Yambina Crescent, Warramanga has cost the ACT Government more than $100,000 in court costs. Neighbour Wayne Mitchell isn't impressed with the saga. Photo: Graham Tidy

The ACT government has spent more than $100,000 in trying to resolve a Waramanga home extension saga that has dragged on since before the dismissal of Gough Whitlam.

Paul and Monica Gerondal’s property at 14 Yambina Crescent has been a work in progress since the late 1970s, a period even they concede is ‘‘an excessive amount of time’’.

The couple, who have been afflicted by poor health and a lack of finances, have repeatedly ignored and then challenged or appealed orders from a range of tribunals, authorities and even the Supreme Court to clean up the site and finish the building work.

The unfinished home in Waramanga. Photo: Graham Tidy

A spokeswoman for the Attorney General and Planning Minister, Simon Corbell, said the territory government’s failure to resolve the 38-year-old matter was due to circumstances beyond its control.

Advertisement

‘‘The actions of the planning entities in the past have been challenged at every step by the lessees in the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the ACT Supreme Court,’’ she said.

‘‘It is highly unusual for a matter of this nature to be subjected to this level of appeal by a lessee [and] the costs to the territory have greatly exceeded the cost of undertaking the required works.’’

The government is currently testing the legal framework it intends to use to bring matters to a head.

A number of recent legal actions ‘‘have provided substantial case material that is being utilised in the action plan for the Waramanga site,’’ the spokeswoman said. ‘‘It is possible that when the documents are executed [on the Gerondals] the action may be appealed which may again result in extended litigation.’’

Monica Gerondal told Fairfax Media on Monday this would be the case. ‘‘You always have the right to appeal a bad decision,’’ she said.

The territory government, which has had to expend ‘‘significant time, effort and resources’’ representing itself in a range of forums in the past, is not the only party out of pocket.

When the Gerondals appealed to the Supreme Court in 2004 they represented themselves and lost the case.

The court ordered them to pay the government’s costs to defend the matter. These were initially calculated as $36,762.50 by the government solicitor.

Mr and Mrs Gerondal disputed the assessment and sought a detailed breakdown of the bill. The government then referred the file to a costing solicitor who revised the costs upwards to $51,113.10.

The Supreme Court reduced this to $42,011 but allowed the government to claim the cost of the review, an additional $7,258.38, from the Gerondals. This brought the total final assessment to $49,269.57.

By the time the Gerondals paid the bill, interest accrued at 11 per cent per annum had taken the amount owing up to $70,000 – almost twice the original assessment.

Speaking in 2007, the then minister for planning, Andrew Barr, told the ACT Assembly the Gerondals had made a rod for their own backs.

‘‘The lessees were fully informed when they lodged their application to the ACT Supreme Court for a review of the AAT’s decision (ordering that the site be cleaned up and the work be completed) that they were entering a cost jurisdiction,’’ he said.

‘‘Appeals on decisions of the Tribunal can only be made on a point of law. The decision that the lessees were contesting was one where the law was not ambiguous nor was the way the Authority had applied the law.’’

An attempt to have a contractor enter the Gerondal’s property to carry out the clean-up work mandated by the tribunal and court orders was scuttled by the lessees.

‘‘ACTPLA did commence the steps necessary to undertake action on the site which were again appealed in the AAT by the lessees,’’ the spokeswoman said. ‘‘At the completion of that lengthy process the lessees were again engaged in litigation in the ACT Supreme Court against the ACT government and (they) additionally made criminal allegations against ACTPLA. These allegations were investigated by ACT Policing, resulting in a discontinuance of that investigation.

‘‘Until the completion of both matters all further regulatory action by ACTPLA was put on hold.’’

5 comments

Nothing like the stupendously costly processes employed by the government to threaten people with extreme fines? Account for every ciggie break, coffee and photocopy? You bet!

Hire a bunch of juniors to cost-stuff the case? You bet! Ensure endless bureaucrats are thoroughly interviewed and every persons time charged to the bill? You bet!

$70,000? What crime would receive a 70k fine?

Do as the government says, or ELSE.

Time for a revolution. Make the bill public!

Commenter

Evanism

Location

Date and time

July 04, 2013, 4:41PM

if you read the full story you will see that the original COURT COSTS were $36,000 if they'd paid them when they lost the case. They instead decided to throw good money after bad and dispute the costs and asked for a rundown of them. That was increased to $51,000 but reduced to $42,000 which they continued to refuse to pay. When they finally decided to pay, and it was only after they were threatened with their house being sold that amount with interest sent the total to the $70,000. So, if they'd paid the original costs for the case they lost they could have got out of it for half that and had $34,000 left to pay for the cleanup up and renovations. They mad their bed now they have to lie in it. yes I feel sorry for the Mitchells. How would you like to live next to that for 17 years?

Commenter

wednesday

Location

Victoria

Date and time

July 06, 2013, 5:29PM

When does a person's right to appeal ever end - especially when, as stated in the article, people are appealing points on which the law is black and white and unambiguous? I fail to understand why this has been able to go on for so bloody long at great cost to the government, therefore taxpayers by proxy!

Commenter

tigger

Location

Canberra

Date and time

July 04, 2013, 4:50PM

Unbelievable.

They are too ill and too poor to finish a renovation started almost 40 years ago, but they can pay a $70,000 court bill?

Dismiss all proceedings by them and declare them to be vexatious litigants.

Commenter

Robert

Location

Canberra

Date and time

July 04, 2013, 7:01PM

Well, the Gerondals can find $70,00 to pay court costs. They would have been better using that money to pay for the eyesore to be fixed. Even if they'd paid the original fees of $42,000 they would still have had $28,000, probably still more than enough to fix their eyesore. Kick them out and bulldoze the place. Yes make them vixatious litigants and stop them wasting more of their own money before they force themselves out of their own home. This would allow them the money to finish it.